w. a lot of it actually depends on what the objective is. if your objective is to destroy the chemical munitions perhaps you could go in and bomb them or otherwise sabotage them. if your goal is to secure them and remove them so that they don't fall into the hands of others and that requires boots on the ground, then that's going to require all sorts of logistical planning and a pretty major effort. in part because, remember, military planners have to plan for the worst case. even if you send a small group of people in, they have to have backup and a way out. there's all sorts of things that have to be planned for, and so as you plan for those contingencies, the number of troops required increases and increases. i think that's a really nasty problem for u.s. military planners, to go and somehow destroy or otherwise remove chemical weapons in the middle of a civil war against a country that has a military that is going to fight back. >> it's great -- >> not a happy thing. >> it's great i